A Relief From That Strange Didacticism That Seems To Have Afflicted Us All From The Relentless Traumas 2020-2024; This Is Why CONTEXT Is An Under-Appreciated Patron Saint Of Truth
Since we all know ivm has been given repeatedly for decades safely and is taken so often in many parts of Africa and South and Central America, do we see population declines there? Yeah, I thought not. Yeadon appears to have something else in mind if he won’t engage Tess Lawrie, one of the greatest humans on the planet, in a respectful manner. At least not yet he won’t, but rather he attacks her behind her back rather publicly. Let’s see if he accepts her offer to debate this. Bravo to Tess once again for remaining a stable, compassionate human being.
Considering how widely IVM is used in Africa one would think it would be rather easy to confirm at least anecdotally if it is sterilizing young women. If the local doctors got to thinking on it you'd think a easily spotted pattern would emerge (or not)
The main reason I think someone should at least look into the claim is exactly because it is most widely used in Africa (I believe that is true). It is known that sterilizing experiments have been done in Africa (I believe it was Tetanus shots) and we know many would love to at least slow down the population growth of all nations but particularly 3rd world nations.
All of which is not the same as me saying I believe any of it. But probably should not dismiss it till someone takes a good look at the claim.
For me, perhaps for others also, EVERYTHING has become so preposterous that I no longer know what should be dismissed as a waste of my time and brain cells and what should be examined. There was for example a time when I thought totally preposterous the idea that the USA would collude/cooperate with the CCP to make bio weapons and then deploy such bio weapons on it's citizens. Just seemed unbelievable for a person of my demographic and age group. It was hard enough to get my head around the fact we were funding bio weapons research (because it is illegal and we signed the Nuremberg Accords). But in Wuhan??? Nah, that's the CCP isn't it? After decades of assuming and hearing "the CCP is an existential adversary" finding we were cooperating with them was almost as insane as the bioweapons. Well OK, it seems crazy but we're giving the adversary money to help make bio, weapons??? OK, that's a tough one, BUT SURELY our government would not use those bio weapons against our own citizens. Welp. That did not age well.
So, I'm not prepared to spend time on flat earth stuff. But other than that and a few other things I'm loath to dismiss out of hand most things. That's what got a lot of us in trouble. Most of us foolishly believe "that could not be" only to find out different.
For all we know IVM could be perfectly safe for fertility. But I would not be surprised one bit if "something extra" gets added to IVM "because everyone in Africa takes it". Same way HowBadIsMyBatch.com showed us that as bad as the mRNA clot shots were out of the gate, not all clot shots were the same. Who really knows why but if you are one of the lab rats it is hard to dismiss the thought that special batches were made special ways because the lab rats of some regions needed more clots than others.
Read all 16 studies on fertility and ivm in mice, rats, rabbits, heifers, bulls, horses, etc. It only seemed to affect it at all in mice/rats. Of course, they give humongous doses to all these animals when trialing it for issues. It improved fertility in bulls, horses, if you can believe any study these days. All I know is, I used it on tens of very sick patients during Covid and not one went to hospital, dropped their oxygen sats, developed Covid organizing pneumonia, or got Long Covid. They were all old with multiple comorbidities, so can’t speculate on the fertility aspects, naturally. Most people who need it to quell a severe RNA virus (like SARSCov2) infection, are not young anyway. So really, it’s not all that germane of an issue. As for parasites of many types, I’m certain India, Africa, and Central and South America would be noticeably affected if it dampened fertility that much. As noted by their population levels…. No, looks like they’re doing fine. Yes, there has been some hanky panky from Gates in vaccines given to Africans. Don’t know the details though. I think you may be right one of them was the tetanus vaccine. Could be others too though, he is such a horrible cad.
Thanks for adding clarity and authoritative information. As I think I stated (more or less) "I don't really think IVM is a fertility threat but would not dismiss it out of hand because I have lost all trust in everything".
It says more about me and my loss of trust than it says about IVM. Suspect there are many others who feel betrayed by the bio weapon attack and have lost ALL trust also.
It is known they did fertility damaging experiments in Africa without prior knowledge or consent so all suspicions get taken seriously whether justified or not
In any case, death is the ultimate fertility loss and I would never consider for an instant not using IVM if I needed it If someone said "someone is paranoid about IVM's fertility effect" but other than that it has a near flawless safety profile I would not blink or hesitate. NOT AT MY AGE:) An unsubstantiated paranoia in the face of IVM's near perfect safety profile when used as intended is no basis for risking death.
Plus, for many fertility is a non issue, especially for the older people most at risk of covid harm. And for many others it may actually be considered a benefit. Not that many young people anxious to have babies these days
Bottom line is that because of the loss of trust I feel/felt we can't dismiss such a claim without looking into it.
I do appreciate you adding clarity as I know little other than my trust has been permanently broken. In my opinion that loss of trust was earned by those who caused it. That's what happens when those charged to protect us WILLFULLY lie. I accept good faith mistakes. But when you know there has been willful lying that they KNEW would cause harm for no justifiable reason trust is gone forever.
I’ve lost trust in the entire medical field, too Ray. Not that I ever completely toed the line: I used to tell my patients when they’d come in clamoring for some new drug Pharma was advertising, “Why don’t we wait 3-4 years and see if it kills anyone first, before I prescribe it to you? Let’s try x, y, z first, which are much safer ideas for your concerns.” I completely understand why non-medical people would have lost trust as well, even more so. Happy to have been on the right side of history during that debacle the last 4 years. None of my colleagues were. Dr. Pierre Kory, one of my favorites, has written some good essays on his substack the last week. Check them out. I’m just a free subscriber, so I can’t read everything, but he’s written quite a bit that is not behind a paywall. Cheers and best of health to you, Ray and to all your loved ones. We’re survivors. We’ll stick together. “Don’t let them get away with it” as the ending to Margaret Anna Alice’s poem goes.
Can you believe the ABIM revoked his board certification? How prophetic this is, when Dr. Pierre Kory had just warned us about this Big Pharma ploy, in an interview with Tucker Carlson not too long ago. Simply Incredible!... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/big-pharmas-relentless-assault-now
One thing I don't get is why professionals like you, bother looking at early animal studies, when we have lived experience aka recorded history of it's safety? Even if it sterilized all the mice back in the 80's or 90's, what does that matter?... https://substack.com/profile/74769037-ohbaby/note/c-67552347
It's like the garbage their pushing that Vitamin D is rat poison. You know what else is toxic to rats,.... chocolate. Oh No!
Also baking soda, caffeine, alcohol, avocados, onions, garlic, blue cheese, licorice and citrus fruits,.... all are poisonous to rats. Oh Dear…. look at all that rat poison we’re ingesting! LOL!
Keep sticking to your principles. Better than melatonin for your sleep life
One of the greatest disasters IMO (& others I am sure) was the direct to public marketing of potentially very dangerous prescription drugs. Back in the day we had direct to consumer coffin nail marketing (cigarettes) so I guess someone said "why not untested fresh out of the lab prescription drugs?". We got rid of the cigarette advertising but stuck with the prescription drug advertising to program the public to go to the doctor to demand the next new thing. Cigarette addiction took care of the hit when cigarette advertising was banned till the addicts started to die off and enough addict relative saw the devastation of getting your throat cut out (or whatever) to finally give up on the coffin nails. No problem. The cigarette guys took over big food and now processed food is so addictive we're eating ourselves to death. Add to it the direct to consumer drug marketing and it turns out to be a net gain for team damage.
All the mind control "ask your doctor" commercials we see after watching some idyllic spiel about walking along the beach with an attractive girl and life is good and how the "ask your doctor" drug is going to make your prostate better and make you more attractive to that special someone. I suspect Viox for example was an "ask your doctor" drug. Even with the fines and bad press I suspect it was a net plus to the bottom line. So why stop? All greased and enabled by direct to consumer marketing of experimental fresh off the rack drugs. You march into the doc and brow beat them till they gives you your coffin nail. Because you were "informed" by the "ask your doctor ad"
The ads differ a bit but they're all a bit too cheerful, the actors are always a bit better than you are (in the age demographic), perfect teeth good smiles etc. and almost universally share the "ask your doctor component" which out of the gate puts the doctor on the defensive.
I see and even embrace a bit the tension of not making the doctor the soul gate keeper and having informed patients, but these "ask your doctor ads" are not informing anyone, they are just brainwashing and programming. It is not helpful that tens of millions are spent to nag a doctor into prescribing something just to get the patient to shut up and go away. In the drug scape we now have no one benefits in any optimal way. In the end the only winner is the bottom line and appropriate application of drugs gets lost in the $$$. Neither the doctor OR the patient is served optimally. It's telling that the only other country that allows direct to consumer prescription drug marketing is New Zealand. Even western countries most similar to the USA like the UK & Australia recoil from the idea of direct to consumer prescription drug marketing. I'm not a nanny state guy and definitely believe intelligent people can be addressed intelligently. But walking on the beach "ask your doctor" ads are NOT informational, they're marketing and programming to get you to rush out and DEMAND what may be the next coffin nail
The whole thing is getting ludicrous. Once trusted commentators like Yeadon seem to be getting hysterical about this and many other health related topics, and are exposing either clearly damaged brains or clear intent to cause harm. There is so much sabotage going on, particularly with the armies of naysayers who are criticising each and every potential therapy for each and every potential covid related disease to the point where sick people have nowhere left to turn. Its horrendous and cruel. The last one I read was trying to tell us that parasites are a good thing for the body, do not get out of hand, and never need treatment, so Lee Merritt is a shill. They've clearly never rescued abandoned animals or starving children! But my understanding is that Tess Lawrie was treating cancer with Ivermectin long before covid was a thing. so I imagine she is worth listening to.
I am personally quite unsure how to proceed, as yes, I know that my own brain does get entrapped in the allopathic mindset from time to time (and by that i mean a way of thinking, not the use of drugs) and I know I need to escape it further, but what is going on here is ludicrous.
They are attacking our critical thinking, which went out the window during the pandemic. Fear easily replace reasoning. And they want to keep us confused and frightened. Disease X, new COVID variants, Measles resurgence, Ivermectin is toxic, blah, blah, blah...
They give it to million dollar race horses! They procreate to make more million dollar race horses! Think why they made this up - trying to scare people from using one thing that works!
So another "sacred cow" has been chosen? Anyone who has ACTUALLY read the literature, would be hard pressed to "pick a side", without also having context.😉🤔🤦♀️ There are some flawed studies, deep questions (especially around the microtubules, and the fertility), that need answers, debate and further context, not nullification.
I'll make it simple-
I respect Laurie. I have supported her since her first interview exposed the corruption of the "faked" literature on ivermectin, that was used to "discourage" its use in 2020. She was invested then, as now, in the prophylactic use of Ivermectin. She has also created/funded her better way brand and accepted events, speaking engagements, while also building bank. All with I'm sure, altruistic and good intentions.
TTBOMK, Yeadon while also accepting speaking engagements, has no skin in the game. He's freehold individual, that used to think the same about Ivermectin as Laurie, but now he doesn't. My understanding, he has not profited, received a single cent or started any NFP organisations off the back of covid. How many can say the same?🤔
I actually don't know either of these individuals to really validate their character or motives for or against Ivermectin. What I do know is that I've read the literature as it stands, and drawn my own conclusions, which I'll stand by. Unless you are stage 4 "turbo" cancer diagnosis, then I'd recommend against popping Ivermectin on the daily.
If your taking it for "covid", then there are plenty of therapeutics that neutralise c19, that don't even involve infertility mechanisms, let alone messing with the microtubules, etc.
And if you don't understand why they are being mentioned, then you definitely should do some more due diligence and own your own life.😉🤷♀️BTJMO
Why would anyone read the literature on a drug that's decades old? I'm surprised Tess did.
And if anyone needed more proof of Ivermectin's safety,.. On top of its decades long excellent safety profile in human use,... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/ivermectin-stats-and-side-effects, the thoroughbred breeding industry would have flagged IVM a very long time ago. That is a high stakes industry that is based solely on fertility. Stud fees range as high as 450k. Sires with stud fees that high are worth tens of millions. And so you can imagine how protective wealthy owners would be of their stock. It isn't called the Sport of Kings for nothing. IVM is a very common horse dewormer used regularly throughout the industry. Horses are routinely plagued with parasitic infections living and feeding on pastures. 1987 is the year they approved it for human use. They were using it on livestock and animals even before then,… and would have pulled it immediately, if there was even a hint of infertility. Can anyone honestly believe, Breeding Programs would use a drug for decades on end, that in Dr. Yeadon’s words,... "Is One Of The Most Violent Fertility Toxins Ever"? LOL!
Reading the literature is always important - you know what GRAS means right?🤨 900+ chemicals Just because something has been used for decades doesn't mean it's perfectly safe, or the science was rigorous in the first place. If that were the case, we wouldn't have just closed the ugly case on thalidomide 60yrs after the fact. Science also changes because tools and analysis techniques evolve, understanding of mechanisms of action evolve, and large areas of science is actually considered unsettled, not only in medicine. Yet every single regulatory body or bureacratic institution, or people who like to take the easy option, treat science like it's set in stone, and some sacred cow. Still. After so much in recent years, has showed people that they should question all the things that were previously thought. They should operate under the precautionary principle. And above all, understand that the science is never settled, and those that suggest it is, should perhaps revist the basic principles of science.😐
Which is why I expected Dr Laurie to nothing less, than to go back over the literature again. It's what a good dr or scientist would do!😉
Not in this case regarding a very specific harm for this particular drug. Cause even if it sterilized every lab animal they tested it on, it can't supersede 40 years of recorded history.
I'm not against research, in fact, that is all I have been doing for the past 10+ years. But there is something better than research, and that is lived experience aka recorded history. Thalidomide only became a problem after they saw what it did to expecting mothers and their offspring. Which again, is part of the historical record... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide_scandal
Recorded history has also proven Ivermectin's efficacy. Forget the 100+ studies showing benefits for COVID. They no longer matter. And yet health officials and many doctors are still waiting for gold standard trials. India proved how effective it was for COVID on a massive scale... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/the-ivermectin-miracle-of-uttar-pradesh
NEW ARTICLE: IVERMECTIN is under attack again - a threat to Cancer Industry & Vaccine Cartel
Ivermectin called a "violent anti-fertility drug" just ahead of new mRNA "Vaccines", Pandemic 2.0 & possible lockdowns
Former Pfizer VP, Dr. Mike Yeadon, calls Ivermectin "most violent anti-fertility drug I've ever encountered" in a clip that is widely circulating online.
The attacks on Ivermectin are in full force again.
In July, we had a Canadian doctor fined $40,000 for prescribing Ivermectin in 2021 for COVID.
In August, Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Paul Marik had their Internal Medicine certifications revoked for their "promotion of Ivermectin". This is no coincidence. Neither is the timing of it.
And now, a famous freedom fighter, Dr. Mike Yeadon, comes out with a shocking attack on Ivermectin.
I reviewed 16 fertility studies with IVERMECTIN:
There are possible fertility issues in mice and rats, this has been well known for many years.
Mixed studies on fertility in rabbits. Inconclusive.
No fertility issues in Rams, Heifers, Bulls, Horses and Humans.
Improved fertility in Heifers, Bulls and Horses.
Quick look:
2011 El-Dein et al - FREEZABILITY, DNA INTEGRITY AND FERTILIZING CAPACITY OF SPERMATOZOA OF FRIESIAN BULLS TREATED WITH ANTI - HELMINTHIC DRUGS
"In conclusion, treatment of Friesian bulls with Ivermectin as anti-helminthic drug at a level of 200 µg/kg live body weight improved post-thawing motility and freezability of spermatozoa, percentage of spermatozoa with intact acrosome, and maintained DNA integrity and subsequent fertilizing efficiency of bull spermatozoa as compared to control bulls"
2016 Ghada et al - EFFECT OF ANTHELMINTICS DRUGS ON BIOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BULL FRIESIAN FROZEN SEMEN
"The bulls treated with ivermectin showed significant increase in semen - ejaculate volume, sperm - cells concentration, total sperm output ejaculate, seminal plasma total proteins"
"In conclusion: Ivermectin treatment improved semen qualities by increasing seminal volume and concentration"
2001 Janett et al - Influence of Eqvalan® (ivermectin) on quality and freezability of Stallion Semen
"Our results demonstrate that a single oral application of Ivermectin did not negatively influence the quality and freezability of stallion semen in the no breeding season. Rather, it seems that Ivermectin has a favorable effect on stallion fertility as most sperm parameters examined were significantly improved in treated animals compared to control"
1986 Schroder et al - Effect of Ivermectin on the Reproductive Potential of Breeding Rams
"The semen of the 2 groups was similar before the first and after the last treatments."
"It was concluded that repeated treatment with ivermectin at the recommended dosage of 200 ug/kg will not impair the reproductive potential of rams"
2020 Samuel et al - Effect of ivermectin (Mectizan) on semen and testicular characteristics in Yankasa rams Effect of Ivermectin (Mectizan) on semen and testicular characteristics in Yankasa rams
"It was concluded that repeated use of Ivermectin at the recommended dosage of 200 mg/kg did not alter semen parameters and testicular characteristics, and may not impair reproduction in Yankasa rams."
My response to Dr. Mike Yeadon would be:
“NO, Ivermectin is not a violent anti-fertility drug”.
The peer reviewed literature doesn’t support such a statement and there is no real world evidence of this either, with Ivermectin used for 4 decades in Africa, India, Mexico, etc. (no fertility issues reported)
Dr. Yeadon’s logic on “depopulation” falls apart as well. Young reproductive age people are not taking Ivermectin.
I would argue that Big Pharma’s “War on Ivermectin” has been one of the most costly blunders in the entire Pharmaceutical Industry’s history, instead of being some clever 5D chess game to trap the "unvaccinated".
Why is Ivermectin under attack now?
Millions of people are now learning about Ivermectin’s CANCER fighting capabilities and Ivermectin represents an existential threat to a multi $100 billion Cancer Drug Industry hell bent on bringing failed "Vaccine" technology onboard, to profit from millions of people suffering from Cancer and especially Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Induced Turbo Cancer.
Ivermectin also remains an existential threat to the rollout of new toxic "Vaccines" for Disease X, whether that Disease X is Influenza H5N1, Monkeypox or something else. They will lock us down and tell us that the new "Vaccines" are the “only way out of this Pandemic”.
It’s amazing how much hysteria one 5 minute clip can generate.
There is a lesson in there as well.
There will be a lot of unexpected things thrown at us this time around.
More details in the article, including links to all 16 Ivermectin fertility studies...
That was my first thought also, but if you watch the full interview he is still railing against Big Pharma. I think he has just lost his mind. He is now in the no virus camp. As in they don't exist.
I think there's some comedy on the fact that Yeadon's live audience podcast with James Delingpole took place on the 28th of June, and we begin to pay attention to this now.
Just how much disconnection does censorship and hypercommunication create, I wonder.
This is an issue, the censorship and the isolatedness, that Yeadon proves to be a real problem to that live audience by asking how many people were on Telegram, and very few people raised their hands. And he commented that he was only on Telegram. Although he occasionally drops by many substacks comment sections.
And besides much gratitude and applause, in the comments some people abuse him and gaslight him, and he defends pretty well, but this digital gulag we are in is so disperse and pathetic, and the trolls just never learn they are being used by the chaos agents and double agents who unsuccessfully try to warn them to not do the dirty work of the enemy.
I learned the hard way to see the fun aspect of almost everything. That's the great benefit that I have earned during my life spent in this gulag or this decade of the boring twenties.
Recently, thanks to the weird attack on the Sam and Mark Bailey, we've learned that of the classic NAV trolls that have tormented many users on substack, some of them were actually more than trolls, like actual psychiatrists. The Horror, The Horror!
Even worse than that, we have plenty of shill engineers with financial interests, full blown Machiavellian psychopaths who can juggle with several different "personalities" or avatars, running many accounts.
I thought, silly me, that that only happened in very visible controversies, like the Gaza genocide, or the Ukraine thing, or the vaccine campaign, or the AIDS controversy. But the virus debate is a very small topic in terms of audience numbers.
Censorship is very effective, but why are there so many professional wardens among us? It's almost like one of those clandestine meetings of Communist Party members in the 1930s where the assistance was topped by a majority of FEDs and the real communists knew who they were because they always paid the party fees on time, and on the first day of the month.
Another speaker at TGR was Tess Lawrie, a promoter of Ivermectin. She runs the Evidence-Based Medical Consultancy, worked with the WHO re data collection on a study of prenatal health care behavior. This is directly connected to development impact bonds, a form of social impact investing, which monitors behavior and rewards investors for observable changes in behavior of subjects. All of this is connected to data analytics, ongoing bio-surveillance, pre-emptive strikes against “disease,” pay for success impact investing, with success defined as the avoidance or the lessening of disease impacts. [See slides 38,39]
The big issue here, the “acid test,” is rule by electron-microscope, seeing what’s happening via the lens of germ theory, making it out to be a medical bio-sciences problem, including the notion of “bio-weapon.” Cost savings (in terms of public “health”) and impact investing oriented to seeing such offsets as a “success” to be rewarded. Dr Pierre Kory is quoted in RFK Jr’s book as to how the use of early treatment could have cut down hospitalizations by 90%, deaths by 75%, saving hundreds of billions of dollars, ending the “pandemic” by May 2020. Joe Rogan has likewise promoted repurposed drugs, turning the situation into an impact investment space. This is a perfect example of rule by electron-microscope, with the early treatment protocol being a blockchain chain. If you accept rule by electron-microscope, you will be spending the rest of your life under it. 85-90% of the stuff currently being spun by the “resistance” involves precisely such an acceptance. Tess Lowry also pushes “early treatment,” which is a weaponized narrative, enhancing fear.[Slides 51-3]
The entire narrative of “mismanaged pandemic” (the title of RFK Jr’s book’s first chapter) is based upon rule by electron-microscope and the promotion of testing with early treatment (a week after someone tests “positive”) using repurposed drugs such as HCQ and Ivermectin. But the virus has never been physically isolated, it has only been identified “in silico” (on a computer), whip what are we supposed to be “treating”? [Indeed, what are we supposedly detecting with the “early testing”?] Are we now gonna treat people who are asymptomatic on the basis of tests which are not calibrated using an actual virus? How much room does this open for mistreatment, at the very least? This is a perfect setup for a pay-for-success investment model. Testing and treating people who are asymptomatic assumes they are infectious. This is exactly what James Bullard, CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis suggested in April 2020, universal testing. Such a massive use of testing and early treatment requires data analytics of massive amounts of biometric data, a perfect setup for social impact investing. [See slides 51-4, 58)
Someone whose work should be discussed regarding this topic is Steve Kirsch, a very wealthy friend of RFK Jr, with connections to MIT and the “alternative” professionals pushing testing and early treatment. See slide 61. He has his own enterprise, CETF, Covid Early Treatment Fund, slide 59. CETF has a direct connection to the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisers, slide 60. There is a big problem in the “resistance” with celebrity culture, which allows people to look right past such connections and not say a word. [in part a sign of how deep fear has permeated so many people that they would rather overlook stuff like this as mere “blemishes” and “imperfections.” ] Thus, Dr Malone can tell Joe Rogan that a CIA friend told him 1/4/20 that “we got a problem with the virus,” and no questions are raised re the “virus” or the source of the information. Kirsch is involved with the One ID system and token financing (usage of tokens in finance). Kirsch has been prominent in challenging people who raise the perspective that no virus has been isolated, no surprise given that the entire pay-for-success early testing/early “treatment” program requires a virus in order to be viable. 85-90% of the resistance, per Alison, have leaned into the rule by electron-microscope model. So many of them are opposed to allopathic medicine, yet have no problems with a program which is based on pharmaceutical drugs.
Poison, hardly. It's nearly impossible to overdose on Ivermectin. The LD50 (amount needed to kill 50% of test samples) for Ivermectin is around 50mg/kg. That’s 125 times the amount recommended to treat a COVID infection (0.4mg/kg)... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17234315/
I weigh 220 lbs. If I wanted to do myself in with Ivermectin, I would need more than 4 boxes. That's over 400 12mg tabs. LOL!
"biological poison, possibly infertility, over dosage will certainly have damaging effects"
Let's not pretend these are all rat harms you speak of. LOL! You are inferring Ivermectin can be dangerous to humans, when it is one of the safest medications ever produced. 100 times safer than Aspirin or Tylenol.
Both Yeadon and Lawrie have done good work beginning early in the c-19 psyop. I believe that Mike woke up earlier and more completely, as I’ve followed both since the start of the bad old days. I think the sparring regarding Ivermectin is healthy, and what science should look like. Those of us lamenting the death of true science shouldn’t fall into the trap of picking a team before a question is settled. There should be no sacred cows, not even ivermectin. Let’s have these two brilliant scientists hash it out and let’s review the evidence along with them. In the meantime, young people shouldn’t need ivermectin to get through the illness. They survived almost 100% before ivermectin came on the scene. All drugs come with risk. Why risk it?
I offer a few conjectures on Ivermectin being a Trojan horse or something in that space. I'm not claiming truth, only possibilities, that may all amount to nil.
There is an idea that parasites may not be pathogenic. We are talking multicellular parasites, very small worms sometimes called 'nematodes.'
So the idea is that when certain types of internal damage occur, these worms find their way to were the problem is. For example, one story I read was that if there is a brain tumor, the worms go there to literally eat the tumor, saving the life of the human who is developing it. Is there evidence for this? I don't know. This story I heard sounds like a dogmatic application of some weird new age principle.
But if it were true that worms repair damage in our vital organs, then anti-parasitic medication would be preventing the cure. Same with dogs, horses, cats, cows.
Another idea is that of the binary bioweapon supplements+ivermectin. The supplements would enhance the toxicity of an assumed safe dose of IVM by preventing the elimination of IVM, which would accumulate and ends up causing damage.
This could also explain the progression of diabetic patients toward permanent disabilities.
A third idea: microplastics. Worms would eat the microplastics that may be stuck in some organs. This conjecture imitates another story about some types of bacteria who, surprisingly, are capable of digesting plastic materials like polycarbonate, who were thought to be inert and that they would loiter the oceans forever. It seems there are experiments on landfills using plastic-eating bacteria. But can worms do that too? I've no idea.
This is approaching the nanochips and the theoretical graphenic materials. According to some other story I read I can't remember where, maybe they need the IVM to make sure the chips stay in place and are not eliminated by the body. This sounds very fantastic. If true, I doubt there would ever be a study on that. Sounds top secret stuff.
---
My own take: I think it's slightly possible that IVM is harmless, at the doses that it's being used, but I lean 80% toward the view that it is toxic, long term, all things considered. And intentional, too.
But we are in the middle of a psyop that seeks to cause confusion and anger in people who self-medicate or who take IVM regularly because they are afraid of covid or the injection.
So, I think normal people are now being drilled like soldiers, forcing on them humiliation, confusion, and shame of having been wrong, a course of trauma induction that doctors and nurses were drilled into years ago. In the end this would create a state of psychopathy.
This is awful but the only defense is acknowledging reality: they toy with everyone, regardless of what IVM really is meant to do. When we accept that, we can relax, and think.
Dr. Mike Yeadon also has a Substack, but he uses an administrator to run that, as he does his Telegram channel. This is interesting to me. Why Mike would be delegating administration to these sites beats me. Perhaps he doesn't like dealing with trolls or detractors? Anyway, it's unusual, almost like he isn't running the show.
The administration guy is named Tim West, and he also has his own Substack and X accounts.
Tim is a rather strict administrator who takes a Starmaresque attitude to dissent or protest, banning people for what you and I might consider trivial reasons. From the tone of his philosophical/intellectual outpourings, he also appears to take himself very seriously, does Tim West.
I've been chatting about him today on another site, and someone suggested that they'd heard Tim West is actually Mike Yeadon in a wig. I J-PEGed their photos and expanded them, but didn't find that very convincing. Seems more plausible to me that Tim West is Andy Warhol after a binge diet.
My own idea, and it's only a hunch, is that Tim West (@timthagoras) may be "Tim Truth." He has the brains to do that kind of work, he's "bolshy" enough to do it, and he looks like he has the aptitude and personality to make those gaudy graphics. I also figured that since Mike Yeadon has so few friends, it is unlikely that he would have two named Tim.
Anyway, we all love a good mystery, don't we? And MIke's rather sudden and extremely radical shift from advocate of Ivermectin to prophet of doom and promoter of the "All the Medical Freedom Doctors Are Part of the Op" theory certainly begs a few questions—such as what precisely changed his mind?, how did he get through all that Tim Truth material and verify it with such certainty in three weeks?, and why make blanket insinuations of this nature in the absence of strong evidence?
I began two days ago from an attitude defending Mike from accusations that he was a "BigPharma whore" or that he was part of an "Intelligence psyop", and as of now I still defend him. But I must say I have questions. There's more here than meets the eye.
I commend Dr. Tess Lawrie for the way she is trying to handle this. She is an ideal person for getting to the bottom of it, in my opinion.
Tim Truth removed my comments from his Dr. Yeadon bombshell post. But they still remain at Dr. Yeadon's substack. Go figure. I also post it as a note... https://substack.com/@ohbaby/note/c-67552347
"Looks like Dr. Yeadon has succumbed to Big Pharma’s influence. Either that, or he has lost his mind. For a scientist to come up with such an absurd proposition is preposterous."
I am still scratching my head about Mike Yeadon's recent attack on ivermectin and his embrace of the "no virus/no contagion" position without offering anything substantial to put in its place to account for how colds and flu appear to spread between people who are in close contact, and insisting that it's not his job to do that.
Something doesn't appear to add up. I wrote something somewhere else yesterday that included the following:
I like Mike Yeadon and I believe he is an honest and intelligent and courageous individual whose warnings at the start of the pandemic and in the run-up to the vaccination campaign helped many people to refuse to be jabbed. But…
• I don’t understand why Mike has come to the conclusion that viruses don’t exist, even after reading his explanations.
• I don’t understand why Mike came out with a warning for people not to take Ivermectin, which has been used safely over decades as an anti-parasite medication and was proven safe and effective in the treatment of COVID-19 in the doses required. (In Mike’s favor, his initial comments re. Ivermectin were made off-the-cuff during a live interview, and I’m sure his actual stance is more refined and nuanced that what emerged during his talk with James, and I know he doesn’t condemn the use of that drug in modest single doses for anti-parasite treatment.)
• I don’t understand why Mike doesn’t administer his own Substack site, as most Substackers do . . . and why he appears to hide behind a “caretaker”. Interestingly, the Baileys also apparently have a similar arrangement at their website. You may think you are writing to Sam or Mark, but you will probably be read and replied to, or banned, by an assistant. (I know, with the thousands upon thousands of messages they get, there are not enough hours in a day…..)
• And I don’t know why Mike would slap an irrelevant condition on having a discussion with Tess Lawrie. Discuss or don’t discuss. No need to bring in third parties.
I remember Tim the Enchanter, from Monty Python and the Holy Grrrrrail.
Timthagoras is a crybully and a sycophant. He does a good job of putting together the various telegram messages of Dr. Yeadon, for the illustration of substackers.
Tim Truth is something of a serial clickbaiter, but he is mostly an trollish entertainer, IMHO.
Abandon hope, all who enter in there. The videos have the most garish, gaudy graphics and fear-porn headlines, giving the site the appearance of The National Enquirer on steroids.
If the information presented on this site was true, why present it in this "beyond Jeff Rense and Alex Jones" fashion? Verily, I say unto thee, nobody with an IQ in three figures could possibly mistake Tim Truth's Substack for a serious contribution to serious debate. I am not touching on the content, but just the overall presentation style. Ask yourselves, is this guy asking you to take him seriously, or does he just want you to have some vicarious fun?
Probably referring to the British Army 77th Brigade - which came to public attention during the peak of the lock down phase of the pandemic. Wikipedia defines it thus:
“The 77th Brigade is a British Army formation, created in January 2015 by renaming the Security Assistance Group which was created under the Army 2020 concept. A previous 77th Brigade served in World War I. The present brigade's broad purpose is to conduct psychological operations. It is based at Denison Barracks in Hermitage, Berkshire and became operational in April 2015.”
As I understand it, this military unit carried out operations on behalf of the British Government to manipulate public psychology to induce British people to partake of the magic mRNA injectables that were supposed to stop the spread of the Covid-19 infection in its tracks.
Since we all know ivm has been given repeatedly for decades safely and is taken so often in many parts of Africa and South and Central America, do we see population declines there? Yeah, I thought not. Yeadon appears to have something else in mind if he won’t engage Tess Lawrie, one of the greatest humans on the planet, in a respectful manner. At least not yet he won’t, but rather he attacks her behind her back rather publicly. Let’s see if he accepts her offer to debate this. Bravo to Tess once again for remaining a stable, compassionate human being.
Considering how widely IVM is used in Africa one would think it would be rather easy to confirm at least anecdotally if it is sterilizing young women. If the local doctors got to thinking on it you'd think a easily spotted pattern would emerge (or not)
The main reason I think someone should at least look into the claim is exactly because it is most widely used in Africa (I believe that is true). It is known that sterilizing experiments have been done in Africa (I believe it was Tetanus shots) and we know many would love to at least slow down the population growth of all nations but particularly 3rd world nations.
All of which is not the same as me saying I believe any of it. But probably should not dismiss it till someone takes a good look at the claim.
For me, perhaps for others also, EVERYTHING has become so preposterous that I no longer know what should be dismissed as a waste of my time and brain cells and what should be examined. There was for example a time when I thought totally preposterous the idea that the USA would collude/cooperate with the CCP to make bio weapons and then deploy such bio weapons on it's citizens. Just seemed unbelievable for a person of my demographic and age group. It was hard enough to get my head around the fact we were funding bio weapons research (because it is illegal and we signed the Nuremberg Accords). But in Wuhan??? Nah, that's the CCP isn't it? After decades of assuming and hearing "the CCP is an existential adversary" finding we were cooperating with them was almost as insane as the bioweapons. Well OK, it seems crazy but we're giving the adversary money to help make bio, weapons??? OK, that's a tough one, BUT SURELY our government would not use those bio weapons against our own citizens. Welp. That did not age well.
So, I'm not prepared to spend time on flat earth stuff. But other than that and a few other things I'm loath to dismiss out of hand most things. That's what got a lot of us in trouble. Most of us foolishly believe "that could not be" only to find out different.
For all we know IVM could be perfectly safe for fertility. But I would not be surprised one bit if "something extra" gets added to IVM "because everyone in Africa takes it". Same way HowBadIsMyBatch.com showed us that as bad as the mRNA clot shots were out of the gate, not all clot shots were the same. Who really knows why but if you are one of the lab rats it is hard to dismiss the thought that special batches were made special ways because the lab rats of some regions needed more clots than others.
Read all 16 studies on fertility and ivm in mice, rats, rabbits, heifers, bulls, horses, etc. It only seemed to affect it at all in mice/rats. Of course, they give humongous doses to all these animals when trialing it for issues. It improved fertility in bulls, horses, if you can believe any study these days. All I know is, I used it on tens of very sick patients during Covid and not one went to hospital, dropped their oxygen sats, developed Covid organizing pneumonia, or got Long Covid. They were all old with multiple comorbidities, so can’t speculate on the fertility aspects, naturally. Most people who need it to quell a severe RNA virus (like SARSCov2) infection, are not young anyway. So really, it’s not all that germane of an issue. As for parasites of many types, I’m certain India, Africa, and Central and South America would be noticeably affected if it dampened fertility that much. As noted by their population levels…. No, looks like they’re doing fine. Yes, there has been some hanky panky from Gates in vaccines given to Africans. Don’t know the details though. I think you may be right one of them was the tetanus vaccine. Could be others too though, he is such a horrible cad.
Thanks for adding clarity and authoritative information. As I think I stated (more or less) "I don't really think IVM is a fertility threat but would not dismiss it out of hand because I have lost all trust in everything".
It says more about me and my loss of trust than it says about IVM. Suspect there are many others who feel betrayed by the bio weapon attack and have lost ALL trust also.
It is known they did fertility damaging experiments in Africa without prior knowledge or consent so all suspicions get taken seriously whether justified or not
In any case, death is the ultimate fertility loss and I would never consider for an instant not using IVM if I needed it If someone said "someone is paranoid about IVM's fertility effect" but other than that it has a near flawless safety profile I would not blink or hesitate. NOT AT MY AGE:) An unsubstantiated paranoia in the face of IVM's near perfect safety profile when used as intended is no basis for risking death.
Plus, for many fertility is a non issue, especially for the older people most at risk of covid harm. And for many others it may actually be considered a benefit. Not that many young people anxious to have babies these days
Bottom line is that because of the loss of trust I feel/felt we can't dismiss such a claim without looking into it.
I do appreciate you adding clarity as I know little other than my trust has been permanently broken. In my opinion that loss of trust was earned by those who caused it. That's what happens when those charged to protect us WILLFULLY lie. I accept good faith mistakes. But when you know there has been willful lying that they KNEW would cause harm for no justifiable reason trust is gone forever.
I’ve lost trust in the entire medical field, too Ray. Not that I ever completely toed the line: I used to tell my patients when they’d come in clamoring for some new drug Pharma was advertising, “Why don’t we wait 3-4 years and see if it kills anyone first, before I prescribe it to you? Let’s try x, y, z first, which are much safer ideas for your concerns.” I completely understand why non-medical people would have lost trust as well, even more so. Happy to have been on the right side of history during that debacle the last 4 years. None of my colleagues were. Dr. Pierre Kory, one of my favorites, has written some good essays on his substack the last week. Check them out. I’m just a free subscriber, so I can’t read everything, but he’s written quite a bit that is not behind a paywall. Cheers and best of health to you, Ray and to all your loved ones. We’re survivors. We’ll stick together. “Don’t let them get away with it” as the ending to Margaret Anna Alice’s poem goes.
Can you believe the ABIM revoked his board certification? How prophetic this is, when Dr. Pierre Kory had just warned us about this Big Pharma ploy, in an interview with Tucker Carlson not too long ago. Simply Incredible!... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/big-pharmas-relentless-assault-now
One thing I don't get is why professionals like you, bother looking at early animal studies, when we have lived experience aka recorded history of it's safety? Even if it sterilized all the mice back in the 80's or 90's, what does that matter?... https://substack.com/profile/74769037-ohbaby/note/c-67552347
It's like the garbage their pushing that Vitamin D is rat poison. You know what else is toxic to rats,.... chocolate. Oh No!
Also baking soda, caffeine, alcohol, avocados, onions, garlic, blue cheese, licorice and citrus fruits,.... all are poisonous to rats. Oh Dear…. look at all that rat poison we’re ingesting! LOL!
Keep sticking to your principles. Better than melatonin for your sleep life
One of the greatest disasters IMO (& others I am sure) was the direct to public marketing of potentially very dangerous prescription drugs. Back in the day we had direct to consumer coffin nail marketing (cigarettes) so I guess someone said "why not untested fresh out of the lab prescription drugs?". We got rid of the cigarette advertising but stuck with the prescription drug advertising to program the public to go to the doctor to demand the next new thing. Cigarette addiction took care of the hit when cigarette advertising was banned till the addicts started to die off and enough addict relative saw the devastation of getting your throat cut out (or whatever) to finally give up on the coffin nails. No problem. The cigarette guys took over big food and now processed food is so addictive we're eating ourselves to death. Add to it the direct to consumer drug marketing and it turns out to be a net gain for team damage.
All the mind control "ask your doctor" commercials we see after watching some idyllic spiel about walking along the beach with an attractive girl and life is good and how the "ask your doctor" drug is going to make your prostate better and make you more attractive to that special someone. I suspect Viox for example was an "ask your doctor" drug. Even with the fines and bad press I suspect it was a net plus to the bottom line. So why stop? All greased and enabled by direct to consumer marketing of experimental fresh off the rack drugs. You march into the doc and brow beat them till they gives you your coffin nail. Because you were "informed" by the "ask your doctor ad"
The ads differ a bit but they're all a bit too cheerful, the actors are always a bit better than you are (in the age demographic), perfect teeth good smiles etc. and almost universally share the "ask your doctor component" which out of the gate puts the doctor on the defensive.
I see and even embrace a bit the tension of not making the doctor the soul gate keeper and having informed patients, but these "ask your doctor ads" are not informing anyone, they are just brainwashing and programming. It is not helpful that tens of millions are spent to nag a doctor into prescribing something just to get the patient to shut up and go away. In the drug scape we now have no one benefits in any optimal way. In the end the only winner is the bottom line and appropriate application of drugs gets lost in the $$$. Neither the doctor OR the patient is served optimally. It's telling that the only other country that allows direct to consumer prescription drug marketing is New Zealand. Even western countries most similar to the USA like the UK & Australia recoil from the idea of direct to consumer prescription drug marketing. I'm not a nanny state guy and definitely believe intelligent people can be addressed intelligently. But walking on the beach "ask your doctor" ads are NOT informational, they're marketing and programming to get you to rush out and DEMAND what may be the next coffin nail
Does he? That's rather sad.
The whole thing is getting ludicrous. Once trusted commentators like Yeadon seem to be getting hysterical about this and many other health related topics, and are exposing either clearly damaged brains or clear intent to cause harm. There is so much sabotage going on, particularly with the armies of naysayers who are criticising each and every potential therapy for each and every potential covid related disease to the point where sick people have nowhere left to turn. Its horrendous and cruel. The last one I read was trying to tell us that parasites are a good thing for the body, do not get out of hand, and never need treatment, so Lee Merritt is a shill. They've clearly never rescued abandoned animals or starving children! But my understanding is that Tess Lawrie was treating cancer with Ivermectin long before covid was a thing. so I imagine she is worth listening to.
I am personally quite unsure how to proceed, as yes, I know that my own brain does get entrapped in the allopathic mindset from time to time (and by that i mean a way of thinking, not the use of drugs) and I know I need to escape it further, but what is going on here is ludicrous.
They are attacking our critical thinking, which went out the window during the pandemic. Fear easily replace reasoning. And they want to keep us confused and frightened. Disease X, new COVID variants, Measles resurgence, Ivermectin is toxic, blah, blah, blah...
Maybe this will help clear up the Ivermectin fertility issue.... https://substack.com/@ohbaby/note/c-67552347
More on its safety and effectiveness...,
https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/why-everyone-should-have-ivermectin
https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/ivermectin-stats-and-side-effects
They give it to million dollar race horses! They procreate to make more million dollar race horses! Think why they made this up - trying to scare people from using one thing that works!
That was the first thing that came to my mind. I posted this on Tim Truth's page and he removed it... https://substack.com/profile/74769037-ohbaby/note/c-67552347
I trust Tess Lawrie on this topic. I do not trust Mike Yeadon.
https://open.substack.com/pub/drtesslawrie/p/is-ivermectin-really-a-genocidal-f19?r=hhrgg&utm_medium=ios
So another "sacred cow" has been chosen? Anyone who has ACTUALLY read the literature, would be hard pressed to "pick a side", without also having context.😉🤔🤦♀️ There are some flawed studies, deep questions (especially around the microtubules, and the fertility), that need answers, debate and further context, not nullification.
I'll make it simple-
I respect Laurie. I have supported her since her first interview exposed the corruption of the "faked" literature on ivermectin, that was used to "discourage" its use in 2020. She was invested then, as now, in the prophylactic use of Ivermectin. She has also created/funded her better way brand and accepted events, speaking engagements, while also building bank. All with I'm sure, altruistic and good intentions.
TTBOMK, Yeadon while also accepting speaking engagements, has no skin in the game. He's freehold individual, that used to think the same about Ivermectin as Laurie, but now he doesn't. My understanding, he has not profited, received a single cent or started any NFP organisations off the back of covid. How many can say the same?🤔
I actually don't know either of these individuals to really validate their character or motives for or against Ivermectin. What I do know is that I've read the literature as it stands, and drawn my own conclusions, which I'll stand by. Unless you are stage 4 "turbo" cancer diagnosis, then I'd recommend against popping Ivermectin on the daily.
If your taking it for "covid", then there are plenty of therapeutics that neutralise c19, that don't even involve infertility mechanisms, let alone messing with the microtubules, etc.
And if you don't understand why they are being mentioned, then you definitely should do some more due diligence and own your own life.😉🤷♀️BTJMO
#takeresponsibility #wearemany #wearememory #wewillnotforget #mistakeswereNOTmade #getnoisy #getlocalised
"Anyone who has ACTUALLY read the literature..."
Why would anyone read the literature on a drug that's decades old? I'm surprised Tess did.
And if anyone needed more proof of Ivermectin's safety,.. On top of its decades long excellent safety profile in human use,... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/ivermectin-stats-and-side-effects, the thoroughbred breeding industry would have flagged IVM a very long time ago. That is a high stakes industry that is based solely on fertility. Stud fees range as high as 450k. Sires with stud fees that high are worth tens of millions. And so you can imagine how protective wealthy owners would be of their stock. It isn't called the Sport of Kings for nothing. IVM is a very common horse dewormer used regularly throughout the industry. Horses are routinely plagued with parasitic infections living and feeding on pastures. 1987 is the year they approved it for human use. They were using it on livestock and animals even before then,… and would have pulled it immediately, if there was even a hint of infertility. Can anyone honestly believe, Breeding Programs would use a drug for decades on end, that in Dr. Yeadon’s words,... "Is One Of The Most Violent Fertility Toxins Ever"? LOL!
https://www.norbrook.com/media/xbvdosue/golden-rules-for-worming-in-horses.pdf
https://vet-uk.virbac.com/files/live/sites/virbac-b2b-uk/files/Resources/Equine/UK-VET_EQUINE_2019_Equine%20Worming%20Roundtable.pdf
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35384503/
He has truly lost his mind.
Reading the literature is always important - you know what GRAS means right?🤨 900+ chemicals Just because something has been used for decades doesn't mean it's perfectly safe, or the science was rigorous in the first place. If that were the case, we wouldn't have just closed the ugly case on thalidomide 60yrs after the fact. Science also changes because tools and analysis techniques evolve, understanding of mechanisms of action evolve, and large areas of science is actually considered unsettled, not only in medicine. Yet every single regulatory body or bureacratic institution, or people who like to take the easy option, treat science like it's set in stone, and some sacred cow. Still. After so much in recent years, has showed people that they should question all the things that were previously thought. They should operate under the precautionary principle. And above all, understand that the science is never settled, and those that suggest it is, should perhaps revist the basic principles of science.😐
Which is why I expected Dr Laurie to nothing less, than to go back over the literature again. It's what a good dr or scientist would do!😉
Not in this case regarding a very specific harm for this particular drug. Cause even if it sterilized every lab animal they tested it on, it can't supersede 40 years of recorded history.
I'm not against research, in fact, that is all I have been doing for the past 10+ years. But there is something better than research, and that is lived experience aka recorded history. Thalidomide only became a problem after they saw what it did to expecting mothers and their offspring. Which again, is part of the historical record... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide_scandal
Recorded history has also proven Ivermectin's efficacy. Forget the 100+ studies showing benefits for COVID. They no longer matter. And yet health officials and many doctors are still waiting for gold standard trials. India proved how effective it was for COVID on a massive scale... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/the-ivermectin-miracle-of-uttar-pradesh
Here's Dr. Makis' response posted on his Substack and on X regarding Ivermectin:
Aug. 21, 2024
William Makis, MD
@MakisMD
Email: makisw79@yahoo.com
NEW ARTICLE: IVERMECTIN is under attack again - a threat to Cancer Industry & Vaccine Cartel
Ivermectin called a "violent anti-fertility drug" just ahead of new mRNA "Vaccines", Pandemic 2.0 & possible lockdowns
Former Pfizer VP, Dr. Mike Yeadon, calls Ivermectin "most violent anti-fertility drug I've ever encountered" in a clip that is widely circulating online.
The attacks on Ivermectin are in full force again.
In July, we had a Canadian doctor fined $40,000 for prescribing Ivermectin in 2021 for COVID.
In August, Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Paul Marik had their Internal Medicine certifications revoked for their "promotion of Ivermectin". This is no coincidence. Neither is the timing of it.
And now, a famous freedom fighter, Dr. Mike Yeadon, comes out with a shocking attack on Ivermectin.
I reviewed 16 fertility studies with IVERMECTIN:
There are possible fertility issues in mice and rats, this has been well known for many years.
Mixed studies on fertility in rabbits. Inconclusive.
No fertility issues in Rams, Heifers, Bulls, Horses and Humans.
Improved fertility in Heifers, Bulls and Horses.
Quick look:
2011 El-Dein et al - FREEZABILITY, DNA INTEGRITY AND FERTILIZING CAPACITY OF SPERMATOZOA OF FRIESIAN BULLS TREATED WITH ANTI - HELMINTHIC DRUGS
"In conclusion, treatment of Friesian bulls with Ivermectin as anti-helminthic drug at a level of 200 µg/kg live body weight improved post-thawing motility and freezability of spermatozoa, percentage of spermatozoa with intact acrosome, and maintained DNA integrity and subsequent fertilizing efficiency of bull spermatozoa as compared to control bulls"
2016 Ghada et al - EFFECT OF ANTHELMINTICS DRUGS ON BIOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BULL FRIESIAN FROZEN SEMEN
"The bulls treated with ivermectin showed significant increase in semen - ejaculate volume, sperm - cells concentration, total sperm output ejaculate, seminal plasma total proteins"
"In conclusion: Ivermectin treatment improved semen qualities by increasing seminal volume and concentration"
2001 Janett et al - Influence of Eqvalan® (ivermectin) on quality and freezability of Stallion Semen
"Our results demonstrate that a single oral application of Ivermectin did not negatively influence the quality and freezability of stallion semen in the no breeding season. Rather, it seems that Ivermectin has a favorable effect on stallion fertility as most sperm parameters examined were significantly improved in treated animals compared to control"
1986 Schroder et al - Effect of Ivermectin on the Reproductive Potential of Breeding Rams
"The semen of the 2 groups was similar before the first and after the last treatments."
"It was concluded that repeated treatment with ivermectin at the recommended dosage of 200 ug/kg will not impair the reproductive potential of rams"
2020 Samuel et al - Effect of ivermectin (Mectizan) on semen and testicular characteristics in Yankasa rams Effect of Ivermectin (Mectizan) on semen and testicular characteristics in Yankasa rams
"It was concluded that repeated use of Ivermectin at the recommended dosage of 200 mg/kg did not alter semen parameters and testicular characteristics, and may not impair reproduction in Yankasa rams."
My response to Dr. Mike Yeadon would be:
“NO, Ivermectin is not a violent anti-fertility drug”.
The peer reviewed literature doesn’t support such a statement and there is no real world evidence of this either, with Ivermectin used for 4 decades in Africa, India, Mexico, etc. (no fertility issues reported)
Dr. Yeadon’s logic on “depopulation” falls apart as well. Young reproductive age people are not taking Ivermectin.
I would argue that Big Pharma’s “War on Ivermectin” has been one of the most costly blunders in the entire Pharmaceutical Industry’s history, instead of being some clever 5D chess game to trap the "unvaccinated".
Why is Ivermectin under attack now?
Millions of people are now learning about Ivermectin’s CANCER fighting capabilities and Ivermectin represents an existential threat to a multi $100 billion Cancer Drug Industry hell bent on bringing failed "Vaccine" technology onboard, to profit from millions of people suffering from Cancer and especially Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Induced Turbo Cancer.
Ivermectin also remains an existential threat to the rollout of new toxic "Vaccines" for Disease X, whether that Disease X is Influenza H5N1, Monkeypox or something else. They will lock us down and tell us that the new "Vaccines" are the “only way out of this Pandemic”.
It’s amazing how much hysteria one 5 minute clip can generate.
There is a lesson in there as well.
There will be a lot of unexpected things thrown at us this time around.
More details in the article, including links to all 16 Ivermectin fertility studies...
https://makismd.substack.com/p/ivermectin-is-under-attack-again?publication_id=1385328&post_id=147954963&isFreemail=true&r=d9uy3&triedRedirect=true&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
https://x.com/MakisMD/status/1826206352420528190
The first thought that comes to me when I read of a sudden questionable turn is "they got to him".
Exactly. Although we can all come to our own different conclusions from various research.
That was my first thought also, but if you watch the full interview he is still railing against Big Pharma. I think he has just lost his mind. He is now in the no virus camp. As in they don't exist.
The Mike Yeadon train looks to have gone off the rails.
He jumps and stumps but then seems to come around to the facts.
I think there's some comedy on the fact that Yeadon's live audience podcast with James Delingpole took place on the 28th of June, and we begin to pay attention to this now.
Just how much disconnection does censorship and hypercommunication create, I wonder.
This is an issue, the censorship and the isolatedness, that Yeadon proves to be a real problem to that live audience by asking how many people were on Telegram, and very few people raised their hands. And he commented that he was only on Telegram. Although he occasionally drops by many substacks comment sections.
And besides much gratitude and applause, in the comments some people abuse him and gaslight him, and he defends pretty well, but this digital gulag we are in is so disperse and pathetic, and the trolls just never learn they are being used by the chaos agents and double agents who unsuccessfully try to warn them to not do the dirty work of the enemy.
I learned the hard way to see the fun aspect of almost everything. That's the great benefit that I have earned during my life spent in this gulag or this decade of the boring twenties.
Recently, thanks to the weird attack on the Sam and Mark Bailey, we've learned that of the classic NAV trolls that have tormented many users on substack, some of them were actually more than trolls, like actual psychiatrists. The Horror, The Horror!
Even worse than that, we have plenty of shill engineers with financial interests, full blown Machiavellian psychopaths who can juggle with several different "personalities" or avatars, running many accounts.
I thought, silly me, that that only happened in very visible controversies, like the Gaza genocide, or the Ukraine thing, or the vaccine campaign, or the AIDS controversy. But the virus debate is a very small topic in terms of audience numbers.
Censorship is very effective, but why are there so many professional wardens among us? It's almost like one of those clandestine meetings of Communist Party members in the 1930s where the assistance was topped by a majority of FEDs and the real communists knew who they were because they always paid the party fees on time, and on the first day of the month.
I'm sorry, I couldn't resist making that joke.
Tess Lawrie is totally invested in the "pandemic" narrative. See this,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_2sBImR9-A
Opportunity Youth - An In-Depth Follow-up to Questioning "The Greater Reset III”
Here is a link to the slides [180 of them!] for this presentation: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1v8n_VJ0fk4TVxi9txMgEAZrfGhW_EBRuMobvskr2FWw/edit?usp=sharing I refer to some of them, by number.
Another speaker at TGR was Tess Lawrie, a promoter of Ivermectin. She runs the Evidence-Based Medical Consultancy, worked with the WHO re data collection on a study of prenatal health care behavior. This is directly connected to development impact bonds, a form of social impact investing, which monitors behavior and rewards investors for observable changes in behavior of subjects. All of this is connected to data analytics, ongoing bio-surveillance, pre-emptive strikes against “disease,” pay for success impact investing, with success defined as the avoidance or the lessening of disease impacts. [See slides 38,39]
The big issue here, the “acid test,” is rule by electron-microscope, seeing what’s happening via the lens of germ theory, making it out to be a medical bio-sciences problem, including the notion of “bio-weapon.” Cost savings (in terms of public “health”) and impact investing oriented to seeing such offsets as a “success” to be rewarded. Dr Pierre Kory is quoted in RFK Jr’s book as to how the use of early treatment could have cut down hospitalizations by 90%, deaths by 75%, saving hundreds of billions of dollars, ending the “pandemic” by May 2020. Joe Rogan has likewise promoted repurposed drugs, turning the situation into an impact investment space. This is a perfect example of rule by electron-microscope, with the early treatment protocol being a blockchain chain. If you accept rule by electron-microscope, you will be spending the rest of your life under it. 85-90% of the stuff currently being spun by the “resistance” involves precisely such an acceptance. Tess Lowry also pushes “early treatment,” which is a weaponized narrative, enhancing fear.[Slides 51-3]
The entire narrative of “mismanaged pandemic” (the title of RFK Jr’s book’s first chapter) is based upon rule by electron-microscope and the promotion of testing with early treatment (a week after someone tests “positive”) using repurposed drugs such as HCQ and Ivermectin. But the virus has never been physically isolated, it has only been identified “in silico” (on a computer), whip what are we supposed to be “treating”? [Indeed, what are we supposedly detecting with the “early testing”?] Are we now gonna treat people who are asymptomatic on the basis of tests which are not calibrated using an actual virus? How much room does this open for mistreatment, at the very least? This is a perfect setup for a pay-for-success investment model. Testing and treating people who are asymptomatic assumes they are infectious. This is exactly what James Bullard, CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis suggested in April 2020, universal testing. Such a massive use of testing and early treatment requires data analytics of massive amounts of biometric data, a perfect setup for social impact investing. [See slides 51-4, 58)
Someone whose work should be discussed regarding this topic is Steve Kirsch, a very wealthy friend of RFK Jr, with connections to MIT and the “alternative” professionals pushing testing and early treatment. See slide 61. He has his own enterprise, CETF, Covid Early Treatment Fund, slide 59. CETF has a direct connection to the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisers, slide 60. There is a big problem in the “resistance” with celebrity culture, which allows people to look right past such connections and not say a word. [in part a sign of how deep fear has permeated so many people that they would rather overlook stuff like this as mere “blemishes” and “imperfections.” ] Thus, Dr Malone can tell Joe Rogan that a CIA friend told him 1/4/20 that “we got a problem with the virus,” and no questions are raised re the “virus” or the source of the information. Kirsch is involved with the One ID system and token financing (usage of tokens in finance). Kirsch has been prominent in challenging people who raise the perspective that no virus has been isolated, no surprise given that the entire pay-for-success early testing/early “treatment” program requires a virus in order to be viable. 85-90% of the resistance, per Alison, have leaned into the rule by electron-microscope model. So many of them are opposed to allopathic medicine, yet have no problems with a program which is based on pharmaceutical drugs.
Dear Jeff, very important info. thank you! It would be great to forward this to Dr. Yeadon and his assistant, I think they are on Substack also?
I posted it at his Substack..
Tess Lawrie has invited Mike Yeadon to discuss this on camera. He has not yet responded.
https://open.substack.com/pub/drtesslawrie/p/an-invitation-to-dr-mike-yeadon?r=hhrgg&utm_medium=ios
Ivermectin is obviously a biological poison but, the devil is in the dosage.
The correct dosage will eliminate or destroy internal, animal parasite loads ..
The incorrect dosage or overdosage will certainly have damaging effects on larger scale biomass including possibly infertility.
A stupid, un-factual, un-scientific, reactionary polemic has developed over IVM and the "VIRUS"
If someone claims to have "cured covid" with IVM they are deluded.
Any efficacious results in symptomatic humans indicates a parasite reduction ..and not a cure or remedy for a virus ....that does not exist.
Poison, hardly. It's nearly impossible to overdose on Ivermectin. The LD50 (amount needed to kill 50% of test samples) for Ivermectin is around 50mg/kg. That’s 125 times the amount recommended to treat a COVID infection (0.4mg/kg)... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17234315/
I weigh 220 lbs. If I wanted to do myself in with Ivermectin, I would need more than 4 boxes. That's over 400 12mg tabs. LOL!
Whereas just doubling the dose of Hydroxychloroquine may be fatal... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7369162/
While an adverse reaction is not outside the realm of possibilities, while taking Ivermectin, you have a better chance of dying in a plane crash or getting hit by lightning twice! https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/ivermectin-stats-and-side-effects
"biological poison, possibly infertility, over dosage will certainly have damaging effects"
Let's not pretend these are all rat harms you speak of. LOL! You are inferring Ivermectin can be dangerous to humans, when it is one of the safest medications ever produced. 100 times safer than Aspirin or Tylenol.
Don't be angry, this is a good thing while being extremely effective for a great many things... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/why-everyone-should-have-ivermectin
BTW,.. you know what else is toxic to rats? Chocolate... Oh No!... So is baking soda, caffeine, alcohol, avocados, onions, garlic, blue cheese, licorice and citrus fruits are all poisonous to rats. Oh Dear…. look at all that rat poison we’re ingesting! LOL! https://exoticnutrition.com/blogs/blog/unsafe-food-for-rats#:~:text=It%27s%20essential%20to%20be%20aware%20of%20foods%20that,leading%20to%20potential%20complications%20or%20even%20fatal%20outcomes
It's good to see you lighten up some. What did you do? Cut those Prozac's in half? LOL!
Both Yeadon and Lawrie have done good work beginning early in the c-19 psyop. I believe that Mike woke up earlier and more completely, as I’ve followed both since the start of the bad old days. I think the sparring regarding Ivermectin is healthy, and what science should look like. Those of us lamenting the death of true science shouldn’t fall into the trap of picking a team before a question is settled. There should be no sacred cows, not even ivermectin. Let’s have these two brilliant scientists hash it out and let’s review the evidence along with them. In the meantime, young people shouldn’t need ivermectin to get through the illness. They survived almost 100% before ivermectin came on the scene. All drugs come with risk. Why risk it?
It depends if their vaxxed or not... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/why-everyone-should-have-ivermectin
While an adverse reaction is not outside the realm of possibilities, while taking Ivermectin,…. you have a better chance of dying in a plane crash or getting hit by lightning twice... https://ohbaby.substack.com/p/ivermectin-stats-and-side-effects
I offer a few conjectures on Ivermectin being a Trojan horse or something in that space. I'm not claiming truth, only possibilities, that may all amount to nil.
There is an idea that parasites may not be pathogenic. We are talking multicellular parasites, very small worms sometimes called 'nematodes.'
So the idea is that when certain types of internal damage occur, these worms find their way to were the problem is. For example, one story I read was that if there is a brain tumor, the worms go there to literally eat the tumor, saving the life of the human who is developing it. Is there evidence for this? I don't know. This story I heard sounds like a dogmatic application of some weird new age principle.
But if it were true that worms repair damage in our vital organs, then anti-parasitic medication would be preventing the cure. Same with dogs, horses, cats, cows.
Another idea is that of the binary bioweapon supplements+ivermectin. The supplements would enhance the toxicity of an assumed safe dose of IVM by preventing the elimination of IVM, which would accumulate and ends up causing damage.
This could also explain the progression of diabetic patients toward permanent disabilities.
A third idea: microplastics. Worms would eat the microplastics that may be stuck in some organs. This conjecture imitates another story about some types of bacteria who, surprisingly, are capable of digesting plastic materials like polycarbonate, who were thought to be inert and that they would loiter the oceans forever. It seems there are experiments on landfills using plastic-eating bacteria. But can worms do that too? I've no idea.
This is approaching the nanochips and the theoretical graphenic materials. According to some other story I read I can't remember where, maybe they need the IVM to make sure the chips stay in place and are not eliminated by the body. This sounds very fantastic. If true, I doubt there would ever be a study on that. Sounds top secret stuff.
---
My own take: I think it's slightly possible that IVM is harmless, at the doses that it's being used, but I lean 80% toward the view that it is toxic, long term, all things considered. And intentional, too.
But we are in the middle of a psyop that seeks to cause confusion and anger in people who self-medicate or who take IVM regularly because they are afraid of covid or the injection.
So, I think normal people are now being drilled like soldiers, forcing on them humiliation, confusion, and shame of having been wrong, a course of trauma induction that doctors and nurses were drilled into years ago. In the end this would create a state of psychopathy.
This is awful but the only defense is acknowledging reality: they toy with everyone, regardless of what IVM really is meant to do. When we accept that, we can relax, and think.
weird shift in Yeadon's demeanor .....
Thanks Celia. I have come across this Tim person before, he is the most obvious 77th disinformation artist.
Dr. Mike Yeadon also has a Substack, but he uses an administrator to run that, as he does his Telegram channel. This is interesting to me. Why Mike would be delegating administration to these sites beats me. Perhaps he doesn't like dealing with trolls or detractors? Anyway, it's unusual, almost like he isn't running the show.
The administration guy is named Tim West, and he also has his own Substack and X accounts.
https://substack.com/profile/32138407-tim-west?utm_source=account-card
Tim is a rather strict administrator who takes a Starmaresque attitude to dissent or protest, banning people for what you and I might consider trivial reasons. From the tone of his philosophical/intellectual outpourings, he also appears to take himself very seriously, does Tim West.
I've been chatting about him today on another site, and someone suggested that they'd heard Tim West is actually Mike Yeadon in a wig. I J-PEGed their photos and expanded them, but didn't find that very convincing. Seems more plausible to me that Tim West is Andy Warhol after a binge diet.
My own idea, and it's only a hunch, is that Tim West (@timthagoras) may be "Tim Truth." He has the brains to do that kind of work, he's "bolshy" enough to do it, and he looks like he has the aptitude and personality to make those gaudy graphics. I also figured that since Mike Yeadon has so few friends, it is unlikely that he would have two named Tim.
Anyway, we all love a good mystery, don't we? And MIke's rather sudden and extremely radical shift from advocate of Ivermectin to prophet of doom and promoter of the "All the Medical Freedom Doctors Are Part of the Op" theory certainly begs a few questions—such as what precisely changed his mind?, how did he get through all that Tim Truth material and verify it with such certainty in three weeks?, and why make blanket insinuations of this nature in the absence of strong evidence?
I began two days ago from an attitude defending Mike from accusations that he was a "BigPharma whore" or that he was part of an "Intelligence psyop", and as of now I still defend him. But I must say I have questions. There's more here than meets the eye.
I commend Dr. Tess Lawrie for the way she is trying to handle this. She is an ideal person for getting to the bottom of it, in my opinion.
Tim Truth removed my comments from his Dr. Yeadon bombshell post. But they still remain at Dr. Yeadon's substack. Go figure. I also post it as a note... https://substack.com/@ohbaby/note/c-67552347
Thanks for this.
Thank you for this!
Re. your final paragraph:
"Looks like Dr. Yeadon has succumbed to Big Pharma’s influence. Either that, or he has lost his mind. For a scientist to come up with such an absurd proposition is preposterous."
I am still scratching my head about Mike Yeadon's recent attack on ivermectin and his embrace of the "no virus/no contagion" position without offering anything substantial to put in its place to account for how colds and flu appear to spread between people who are in close contact, and insisting that it's not his job to do that.
Something doesn't appear to add up. I wrote something somewhere else yesterday that included the following:
I like Mike Yeadon and I believe he is an honest and intelligent and courageous individual whose warnings at the start of the pandemic and in the run-up to the vaccination campaign helped many people to refuse to be jabbed. But…
• I don’t understand why Mike has come to the conclusion that viruses don’t exist, even after reading his explanations.
• I don’t understand why Mike came out with a warning for people not to take Ivermectin, which has been used safely over decades as an anti-parasite medication and was proven safe and effective in the treatment of COVID-19 in the doses required. (In Mike’s favor, his initial comments re. Ivermectin were made off-the-cuff during a live interview, and I’m sure his actual stance is more refined and nuanced that what emerged during his talk with James, and I know he doesn’t condemn the use of that drug in modest single doses for anti-parasite treatment.)
• I don’t understand why Mike doesn’t administer his own Substack site, as most Substackers do . . . and why he appears to hide behind a “caretaker”. Interestingly, the Baileys also apparently have a similar arrangement at their website. You may think you are writing to Sam or Mark, but you will probably be read and replied to, or banned, by an assistant. (I know, with the thousands upon thousands of messages they get, there are not enough hours in a day…..)
• And I don’t know why Mike would slap an irrelevant condition on having a discussion with Tess Lawrie. Discuss or don’t discuss. No need to bring in third parties.
Mike replied to a comment of mine only a month ago, so you could imagine my shock when his interview was posted on Tim's site...
"I’m done with automatically believing anything. If it was a deep state product, they’d have been shaping its public profile from the moment someone decided it could have a future as an anti/parasitic." https://open.substack.com/pub/conspiracysarah/p/injectable-ivermectin?r=18ik5p&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=60974454
Since that interview happened in June and this post was in August, maybe he flip-flopped again? LOL!
There's no way Mike could face Tess one on one. She would rip him a new butthole, just like she did with Dr. Andrew Hill... https://drtesslawrie.substack.com/p/my-letter-to-dr-andrew-hill-video
I remember Tim the Enchanter, from Monty Python and the Holy Grrrrrail.
Timthagoras is a crybully and a sycophant. He does a good job of putting together the various telegram messages of Dr. Yeadon, for the illustration of substackers.
Tim Truth is something of a serial clickbaiter, but he is mostly an trollish entertainer, IMHO.
This is "Tim Truth"'s Substack.
https://timtruth.substack.com/archive?sort=new
Abandon hope, all who enter in there. The videos have the most garish, gaudy graphics and fear-porn headlines, giving the site the appearance of The National Enquirer on steroids.
If the information presented on this site was true, why present it in this "beyond Jeff Rense and Alex Jones" fashion? Verily, I say unto thee, nobody with an IQ in three figures could possibly mistake Tim Truth's Substack for a serious contribution to serious debate. I am not touching on the content, but just the overall presentation style. Ask yourselves, is this guy asking you to take him seriously, or does he just want you to have some vicarious fun?
I don't know what 77th refers to. Care to explain, please?
Probably referring to the British Army 77th Brigade - which came to public attention during the peak of the lock down phase of the pandemic. Wikipedia defines it thus:
“The 77th Brigade is a British Army formation, created in January 2015 by renaming the Security Assistance Group which was created under the Army 2020 concept. A previous 77th Brigade served in World War I. The present brigade's broad purpose is to conduct psychological operations. It is based at Denison Barracks in Hermitage, Berkshire and became operational in April 2015.”
As I understand it, this military unit carried out operations on behalf of the British Government to manipulate public psychology to induce British people to partake of the magic mRNA injectables that were supposed to stop the spread of the Covid-19 infection in its tracks.
Thanks.
I don't think Tim West is that, but I could be wrong.